smithery/mrgkanev

grant-writing

Develop competitive research funding proposals for major agencies including NSF, NIH, DOE, and foundations. Guides persuasive proposal writing that demonstrates scientific rigor, innovation, and impact.

Installation

$ npx skills add smithery/mrgkanev --skill grant-writing

Similar popular skills

Related neighbors and high-traction skills in the same topics — useful to compare before installing.

Also in this package

Other skills from smithery/mrgkanev.

npx skills add smithery/mrgkanev

Browse all from smithery/mrgkanev

More details

Agent compatibility

Declared targets from SKILL.md / docs. Unmarked agents are not listed — the skill may still install via the CLI.

Claude Code Not declared
Cursor Not declared
Codex Not declared
GitHub Copilot Not declared
Windsurf Not declared
Gemini CLI Not declared
Cline Not declared
OpenCode Not declared

Skill metadata

Parsed from SKILL.md frontmatter.

Allowed toolsRead, Write, Edit, Bash, WebSearch, WebFetch, Task

Package contents

Files included with this skill beyond the listing page.

  • skill md SKILL.md 3,933 B
  • docs SUMMARY.md 223 B

History

  1. First recorded snapshot · 0 installs

SKILL.md

Grant Writing Assistant

Core Philosophy

Funding proposals are persuasive documents that must simultaneously demonstrate scientific rigor, innovative thinking, practical feasibility, and broader significance. Every section should answer: "Why should we fund this work?"

Proposal Components

1. Executive Summary / Abstract

  • Concise overview of the entire project
  • Problem, approach, and expected outcomes
  • Often the only section some reviewers read carefully

2. Specific Aims / Objectives

  • Clear, measurable goals
  • Typically 2-4 aims for most grants
  • Each aim should be independently valuable

3. Significance / Background

  • Establish the problem's importance
  • Demonstrate knowledge of the field
  • Identify the gap your work addresses

4. Innovation Statement

  • What's new about your approach?
  • How does it advance beyond current methods?
  • Technical and conceptual innovation

5. Research Strategy / Approach

  • Detailed methodology
  • Experimental design and rationale
  • Alternative approaches if primary fails

6. Preliminary Data

  • Evidence supporting feasibility
  • Pilot results demonstrating capability
  • Essential for most NIH and many other grants

7. Timeline and Milestones

  • Realistic project schedule
  • Clear deliverables at each stage
  • Demonstrates planning and feasibility

8. Team and Environment

  • Qualifications of key personnel
  • Institutional resources available
  • Collaborative arrangements

9. Budget and Justification

  • Detailed cost breakdown
  • Clear connection between costs and activities
  • Follow agency guidelines precisely

10. Broader Impacts

  • Societal benefits beyond science
  • Training and education components
  • Outreach and dissemination plans

Agency-Specific Guidance

NSF (National Science Foundation)

  • Equal weight on Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts
  • Strong emphasis on societal benefit
  • Integration of research and education valued

NIH (National Institutes of Health)

  • Five review criteria: Significance, Investigator, Innovation, Approach, Environment
  • Preliminary data strongly expected
  • Clinical relevance for translational work

DOE (Department of Energy)

  • Energy and environmental mission alignment
  • Often requires cost-sharing
  • Laboratory partnerships valued

DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency)

  • High-risk, high-reward thinking
  • Transformative potential emphasized
  • Clear transition pathway needed

Foundations

  • Mission alignment critical
  • Often more flexible formatting
  • Relationship building important

Writing Strategies

Persuasive Techniques

  • Lead with the problem's significance
  • Use concrete examples and data
  • Anticipate and address concerns
  • Build narrative momentum

Common Pitfalls to Avoid

  • Overpromising results
  • Vague methodology
  • Ignoring feasibility concerns
  • Missing page or format requirements
  • Weak significance statement

Review Process Understanding

  • Proposals typically reviewed by peers
  • Reviewers have limited time per proposal
  • Make key points easy to find
  • Use clear headings and structure

Proposal Development Workflow

  1. Planning: Analyze announcement, identify fit, outline approach
  2. Drafting: Write sections, gather supporting materials
  3. Internal Review: Get colleague feedback, revise
  4. Finalization: Polish writing, check compliance
  5. Submission: Follow agency procedures exactly

Integration

Works with:

  • lit-review for background research
  • academic-writing for prose quality
  • hypothesis-dev for research design
  • reference-management for citations